He lives in a penthouse in New York, filled with an assortment of expensive items such as antique furniture, rich draperies, paintings, and souvenirs which suggests that he has been quite successful as a land developer. In a sudden shift of mood, Arthur Goldman would bark unchecked commands onto his faithful secretary, causing bursts of paranoia. Arthur loves to sit on the terrace and use the telescope to view the city, claiming he is searching for men in a blue Mercedes while looking at the city. It is evident that’s he’s quite mad. In his dreams, he is haunted by the commandant of the camp, Dorf, which causes severe trauma in his life. Even after 30 years, Dorf appears to still control him and that leads to a painful history for many people. The final and the most baffling question is, did Arthur himself create Dorf? His story is filled with surprises, and puts him on the correct side for the film “The Man in the Glass Booth.” People who claim to defend him do leave the surprises in a blue Mercedes.
They are Israeli agents who capture him and bring him back to Israel for a trial. They contend that he is not Goldman at all, but rather the war criminal, Dorf. There is some evidence to support this position. In his apartment is a secret room filled with Nazi collectibles, and the night prior to his arrest, he heads to that location with the intention of burning the identifying number and blood type tattooed on his arm. Once in Israel, he proclaims that he will represent himself, but it is not and could never be much of a defense. While sitting there, he cheerfully confesses all his crimes, admits them in vivid detail, and instead only claims that he was obeying orders. He is placed in the protective custody of bulletproof glass and the trial opens. It begins more or less in accordance with the timeline without much deviation until the absurd accusation is pressed: Dorf was not pretending to be Goldman, but rather it was Goldman pretending to be Dorf.
Goldman, or one of many Goldman. Because “Arthur Goldman” was a name that was traded and bartered for in the concentration camp by people who were to die under identities that they had adopted. It was an identity that was passed around until no one actually was Arthur Goldman.
And as such the enigma deepens Did “Goldman” manage to usurp Dorf’s identity in a typical case of the persecutor being assimilated by the victim? Or did Dorf assume Goldman’s identity in order to redeem himself from punishment for his misdeeds? But the question here is, who really is the man in the glass booth?
It’s difficult to determine with certainty, but the main intent of “The Man in the Glass Booth” is not to answer questions. It seeks to raise disturbing concepts regarding the definitions of one’s self, wrongdoing, and obligation. And more vividly express how the Holocaust was so immense that individual people ceased to exist. Other movies such as Judgment at Nuremberg started with the hope that civility would be preserved and blame could be done. “The Man in the Glass Booth” is an infinitely more desolate work. Arthur Hiller’s film for the AFT is a rare gem, even though it’s flawed in one critical way. Since film’s elementary characteristic is to capture the outside world, it has a tendency to be realistic in nature. Even when Robert Shaw’s play is adapted by Edward Anhalt into a more realistic version, it still remains symbolic and mannered.
In this objective film world, the situations and dialogue that take place within the confines of a stylized stage setting sometimes appear strange or displaced. This person in the booth, who knows who is impersonated by Maximillian Schell, who has done something of a specialization of roles like this (the credits include “Judgment at Nuremberg,” “The Pedestrian” and “The Odessa File”). Here, he provides the character with a personality that aids the character’s dialog as spoken by him and, in particular, he carries a wonderful madness in scenes where the reasoning of his character derives the inhuman conclusions. Lois Nettleton was a none-too-bad choice for an Israeli prosecutor. She has a calmness coupled with a great deal of intelligence, and she does not flinch. She is the one closest to the film at its moral center.
What’s more, Hiller’s direction achieves the proposed aim of revealing the hell of Goldman-Dorf’s tortured past little by little. At first we do not know how to deal with this bizarre character, pacing around in his penthouse and, every twenty to thirty seconds, switches topics with intensity. But without ever seeming to try to explain something. Hiller calmly brings us into his mind, and into the story, which can finally end only with the death of Goldman Dorf, or of both of them.
To watch more movies visit Fmovies
Also Watch for more movies like:
